This blog is a great opportunity to share ideas about ways to
transform schooling as we know it, to help all students realise their
talents, passions and dreams. Be great to hear from anyone out there! Feel free to add a comment to Bruce's Blog and enter e-mail to receive postings

'You’d think that a scientist who studies how the human brain receives and perceives information would be inherently interested in what we know. But Stuart Firestein says he’s far more intrigued by what we don’t. “Answers create questions,” he says. “We may commonly think that we begin with ignorance and we gain knowledge [but] the more critical step in the process is the reverse of that.”Firestein, who chairs the biological sciences department at Columbia University, teaches a course about how ignorance drives science. In it -- and in his 2012 book on the topic -- he challenges the idea that knowledge and the accumulation of data create certaintyLearning from Aussie mistakes

In Australia school principals have lost the battle about the imposition of standardised testing of their students.

The testing agenda has been pushed worldwide by corporate influences who believe that to improve education requires measuring test results and from them sorting out failing schools. In New York this means rewarding teachers whose students do well and firing those who don't. Performance pay! This business oriented approach has been implemented to various degrees in a number of Anglo-American countries, including New Zealand, as part of the Market Forces ideology. This approach has been called the Global Education Reform Movement or GERM

This is another excellent short video. which shows how New York lawyer and ex Superintendent of New York school ( and Rupert Murdock ) influenced the Australian NAPLAN testing. Recent research is showing that this testing, so loved by politician and parents, has not resulted in any improvement and has caused a narrowing of the curriculum and teaching to the tests.

'Right now across the country one million students, their parents and teachers are sweating on the NAPLAN results - the national numeracy and literacy tests. NAPLAN began in 2008 to compare all students across the country and better help those who are falling behind. We adopted the idea from New York where teachers are promoted or sacked on the back of the results. But we haven't done that here and instead the pressure falls on the students to perform. Teachers here claim NAPLAN retards growth and restricts creativity. A NAPLAN revolt is underway, with one principal even likening the tests to child abuse.'

It is important that New Zealand school principals do not become seduced by their National Standards data as it seems many are.

A focus on short term gains , as a result of a focus on subjects being tested, will slowly destroy the creative teaching New Zealand was once recognised for. Principals and schools need to work together to protect their professional voice.

There are voices out there for creative schools to listen to - Phil Cullen, Young Zhao, Alison Gopnik and Sir Ken Robinson - the list goes on. Those those not sensitive to such voices will be trapped, or seduced, by the ideology of Joel Klein, Rupert Murdock and in NZ National and ACT 'market forces' politicians.

We have a choice!

It seems to me that schools have a choice. To meekly comply and go along with imposed directions, or to fight for what is worth fighting for.

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

Over the years I have come to the conclusion that the
freedom of individuals that was part of the sixties had its dark side; that it
had morphed over the decades into ‘me first’ individual selfishness and as a
result, less concern with the common good. The heady freedom of the sixties,
after an era of austerity, released wave of creativity but ,as traditional
norms lost their power, creativity all too often looked more like indulgence.

With these thoughts
in mind it was interesting to come across Francis
Beckett’s 2010 book ‘What did the
Baby Boomers Ever Do For Us?’ In his book Beckett argues that the children
of the 60s betrayed the generations that came before and after. I am not
totally convinced but he makes a good argument, an argument that is relevant to
the political situation countries like New Zealand currently face

Beckett makes it
clear that political change has its genesis in earlier decades.

Those returning after World War Two, when their time for
power came, knew what to do. In 1945 Major Clement Attlee, replaced war leader
Churchill, and set about changing the cultural norms of the United Kingdom. As Churchill left the palace in his Rolls Royce
concluding his leadership Clement Atlee arrived in his Hillman Minx to take up
the challenge. The less fortunate in Britain had had a difficult time living
through the 1930s depression and deprivation caused by the war – it was time
for change.

Clement Atlee

Attlee’s government set about abolishing the five giants
‘Want, Ignorance, Disease, Squalor and Idleness’ and established the Welfare State
against the fierce opposition of the wealthy. The time was right to create a
fairer society for all.

A similar scenario
happened earlier in New Zealand with the election of the first Labour Government in
1936 led by Michael Joseph Savage. Changes began only to be interrupted by the
declaration of war in 1939. Savage’s government faced the same ‘five giants’ in
post war New Zealand.

As a result the social democratic ideology, both in the
United Kingdom and New Zealand, became the dominant narrative for the next few
decades - until the ‘baby boomers’ came
of age.

‘Baby Boomers’are
those born following the Second World War who came of age in the radical
sixties, when there was , for the first time since the war, was money, safe sex, and freedom. It is
Beckett’s thesis that these young people exercising their new found freedom
were unaware of the price earlier generations paid for this freedom. Most of
them hardly realised the privation of their parents before and during the war
and the struggle that their parents made to ensure that their children were not
to be equally deprived.

For Baby Boomers the sixties were exciting and New Zealand
was not immune. Young people turned their backs on authority and their parents;
it was a rejection of society as it was previously organised. Bob Dylan, a
voice of the sixties gurus, told parents ‘not to criticize what they didn’t
understand’ –‘the trouble the boomers knew’, Beckett writes, ‘what they were
against more than what they were for’. Parents in the sixties reminded the young
that they were fortunate because there were no great causes left in comparison
to them having to survive through the depression and the war. A late 1950s,
movie starring James Dean, was called appropriately, according to Beckett, ‘A
Rebel Without A Cause’! When Dean was asked what he was rebelling against he
replied, ‘What have you got?’

So what began as the most radical-sounding generation for
half a century led eventually to the ideology of the free market established by Margaret Thatcher and led to
its complete expression under New Labour led by the first ‘baby boomer’ prime
Minister Tony Blair. The radicalism of the sixties, unlike the generation
following World War One 1914-1918,
decayed fast.

The short sixties – from the release of the Beatles ‘Love,
love me do’ was to be a wonderful time to be young who had no time for the past
and no appreciation of the privations of their parents. The young had little
memory of the appalling conditions their parents had been forced to live
through without the security provided by the welfare state – with of course the

Beatles,'Love, love love me do'

exceptions of the wealthy upper classes. An out of work father in pre-war days
meant a family near starvation.Parents
returned from the war determined to change all that. That is why Atlee’s
government (and the Savage led government in New Zealand) gave working people
opportunities in health, education, employment, economic security and leisure
that changed the expectations of people dramatically.

First baby boomer UK PM

With time such advances were taken for granted and ‘baby
boomers’ assumed it was the natural order of things. ‘Baby boomers’ fought for,
and won, the right to have their hair long and to enjoy sex. The contraceptive
pill had arrived. There was full employment; ‘Jack was felt to be as good as
his master’.

The baby boomers set about destroying past certainties.Beckett writes that the sixties philosophy
was the ‘direct predecessor of the Thatcherismview that there is no such thing
as society. The children of the sixties were the parents of Thatcherism’.

No such thing as society!

‘The baby boomers had benefited from the victory over Nazism
and the establishment of the welfare state. As teenagers they had spare cash,
and fun ways to spend it – things their parents and grandparents could only
dream of’.

‘Now’, writes Beckett, ‘ as parents, there seems to be a special venom in
the loathing they show their young’. ‘It is though the sixties generation
decided that the freedom they had enjoyed was too good for their children’.The young are now required to pay market
forces for such things as their education – which for their parents was free.
As a result students are now burdened with debt. The baby boomer generation are
now more concerned with protecting their wealth and pensions than freedom for
their young

‘Schools, after a quick burst of sixties freedom, are being
sent back to the fifties as fast as possible’, Beckett writes. School uniforms,
rigid National Curriculums, the ‘three
Rs’, a punishing regime of testing and. increasingly regimented schools Adults
are demanding the respect that in their youth they happily ignored.

Once again gaps between the rich and the poor are being
established and the young once again have to struggle to buy their first homes.
The baby boomers are now old. When they were young they created cult of youth,
and now they are old they selfishly look after themselves. We are returning to
the unequal world of the 1930s.

Time now for a new narrative to redress the unequal
situation we are in as a result of a market forces ideology led by the adult
baby boomers. The protective power of democratic governments has been demeaned
as privatisation provides, for a cost, for services once provided as of right.

Michael Joseph Savage

At some point the generations following the baby boomers
will be forced to confront the inequalities that have been established in Anglo
–American societies.The ever widening
income gap has the power to create conditions for unimaginable changes unless
faced up to.

The self-centred culture established by the mature baby
boomers need to be balanced by a concern for the good of all people. This is
the same challenge that faced Clement Atlee and Michael Joseph Savage in their
respective countries post World War Two.

Not wanted in 1945

What will eventuate may well surprise those currently in
power – as much as Atlee’ victory in 1945 demoralised Winston Churchill. The
private enterprise market forces ideology has not delivered wealth to the poor
as promised – there has been no ‘trickle down.’The wealth has concentrated in the pockets of the few. A ‘winner /loser’ society has been created.

Belief in the political system is at an all-time low as
indicated by falling voting turn outs.A
new vision, one that includes all citizens, needs to be articulated as people
become are of the consequences of the growing inequality. The ‘market forces’
ideology is losing its authority as even the aspirational middle income groups
are finding themselves at risk. The idea that those in charge of industry know
best is wearing thin – the ‘supremacy’ of the wealthy we now experience was
last seen before the great depression.

‘And so the so the greedy eighties’, writes Beckett, ‘became
the beneficiaries of the indulgent sixties. Sixties man, twenty years older,
became eighties man: sleek, sharp-suited, and ready to harness the language of
liberation to the cause of capital.’ It was back to the fifties with a
vengeance’ Sixties hippy gurus have been replaced with new business gurus
preaching economic freedom and minimal government regulation. What eventuated
was ‘a small state, a liberated economy, power in the hands of wealthy individuals
and companies rather than the state’.

A fairer more
equitable society needs to be created. The consideration of the less fortunate
will be to the advantage of us all. Our politicians must create the conditions
where every citizen is able to contribute to the overall wealth of our country.
Such an important role cannot be left to the ideology of the rich, the
technocrats and their self-centred support of minimal government. All that has created
is a greater inequality.

A new government needs to provide a helping hand to all –
the young at school, those requiring employment, heath and homes. It is not
possible to return to the solutions of 1945 but what can be taken is
inspiration of the leaders of those difficult times when it looked as equally
difficult. When the welfare reforms were introduced the wealthy railed against
them – and will again today.

We need a gentler caring society – a new political
consensus, one that values the contribution and creativity of all, not just the
rich. A society that once again cares about the underdog, dedicated to getting
people out of the poverty trap. If a new consensus is not developed we are
heading for a crisis.

The baby boomers are leaving a dismal legacy ‘half are too
busy to notice, half too greedy to care’.As the baby boomers are marching towards the grave they exercise their political
muscle; they have money and they have power.

‘We saw’ says Beckett writing about the baby boomers, ‘the
class barriers come down, and put them up again. If we meant any of the things
we said in the sixties, about peace, about education, about freedom, we would
have created a better world for our children to grow up in, and earned the
comfortable retirement we are going to fight for. But we made a worse one.’

New Zealand in the
sixties was a great place to bring up the young – for many families this is no
longer the case, it is time for a change. Perhaps we need to repeat the sixties
but these times to do it properly? The baby boomers forgot what mattered –
because they had no sense of the world their parents grew up in.

No expects change will be easy – it will require political
courage but for the welfare of the majority it will be worth it. Beckett
concludes his book that we are ‘The generation that has to clear up the mess’
the baby boomers created. ‘Money is not the root of all evil: poverty is. But
you can’t get rid of poverty except by distributing wealth.’ Not a popular idea
amongst the wealthy.

The market forces world of the baby boomers has reached it
use by date having delivered the widest income gap since the 1929 depression. The phrase, once heard by its supporters,
‘there is no alternative’ (TINA) is no longer is relevant. As with Clement
Atlee in the United Kingdom in 1945 and Michael Joseph Savage in the 1930s, new
ideas have to be found to replace failing policies.

Market forces have not worked

The New Zealand Labour Party is now facing the need for the
same transformational challenge of the same degree as those faced by Savage and
Atlee.

The new leadership under David Cunliffe is beginning to express a new
narrative for the future. And as it is further expressed it will tap into the
feelings of those who have been left behind by the neo- liberals, or those who
are sensing that their own security is increasingly at risk, will begin to take
heed of new alternatives.

Labour is returning to its roots and is re-affirming its
founding principles. Its challenge is to present an alternative vision to the
public that gives hope to all and not just to the rich. The time is now right
for Labour to regain real political influence if it can present a viable/doable
set of policies – a real sense of alternative to the wider public. David
Cunliffe has come out strongly against the market forces ideology. He has
realised that the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) and its aftermath requires a
comprehensive rethink of Labours entire policy approach. This is the beginning
of a real shift and, as it grows, has the power to capture energy from those
sensing things are going astray under the current government.Markets have been shown to fail. Business and
government need each other, everybody needs employment and a fair wage.

David Cunliffe is talking about a new beginning – hope and
opportunity for all; a fair and just society in contrast to the world of have
and have nots that is the legacy of previous market forces politicians.
Everyone is entitled to hope for a better future. Regions need to be supported.
Conditions must be created to give a helping hand to all. Sustainable clever
development needs to part of what is to be offered rather than the short term
policies that are all too common today. The welfare of all people must be
placed first rather many being sacrificed to ensure only the well- to- do
benefit.

The adult baby boomers have had their day. Time for them to
move over and to begin to build a world suited for all sections of society and
those yet to be born; to develop the common good as well as encouraging the
creativity of individuals.

Saturday, September 21, 2013

The 1883 Woman's Christian Temperance Union and the Electoral Bill passed through Parliament and was given the Royal Assent by the Governor Lord Glasgow on 19thSeptember 1893.

I wonder how many New Zealand teachers took the time to discuss the importance of this event in the their classrooms?

Arrest and gaol in England!

It's not just making students aware of woman getting the vote but trying to understand and imagine what it must have been like to be involved?

That we all have the vote is taken for granted today but it had been a hard won battle, before this time only men had the right to vote.

It would be a learning experience for students to begin to appreciate the challenge this was for woman facing up to the fierce opposition that came from the men.

Students could research the history of the suffragette movement world wide and the actions of those involved that included gaol, hunger strikes and force feeding and the opposition and ridicule they had to face up to.

Students could try to imagine what is was like for men to have woman dress and behave like men in those times - even smoking cigars in public!

Nasty cartoons

The task of the suffragettes was not easy because many woman believed they had to accept their husbands opinions and did not need to vote! Students might wonder what some woman felt like this? Some men thought woman too foolish to vote while others thought is was a challenge to them as head of the house.

It might be interesting to consider ( and compare numbers to today) that 30 000 woman signed the petition which was about a quarter of the woman in New Zealand at the time.

Woman getting the vote was only a first step, the next was to elect woman as Members of Parliament - which was achieved in 1919. In recent times we have had woman Prime Ministers.

﻿

Kate Shepherd NZ

Today their is a debate about the importance of having equal numbers woman in parliament and in business positions. Do students think these are important and why, or why not?

Do students think men and woman's need and abilities are completely different or do they think that they share most things in common but both sexes have a few different but important characteristics? What might they be? Imagine a world run entirely by men or woman - what might it be like?
﻿

The fight for equality goes on throughout the world. Change is never easy it seems - students might wonder why this is using their knowledge of the suffragette movement as an example.

What would they like to change if they had the chance? Would they be prepared to put themselves at risk to do ? What things are still unfair ?

Who are individuals in history that were prepared to face the power of authority to fight for what they thought was right?Who have been others in history that have had to fight for votes or equality?

The 21stC will
require a personalisation of learning;cultivation of talent and creativity.
It is important for a country like New Zealand for schools to encourage such
innovation and creativity but to achieve this will require considerable
transformation of the current system.

He provides seven
important design principles for teachers to ensure project based learning is of
the highest quality.

Unfortunately many
teachers still equate ‘doing projects’ with something restricted to the
afternoon in primary classes that happens after the real work of literacy and
numeracy is done. And all too often, in my experience, much of the current
inquiry work is little more than superficial ‘cut and paste’ resulting in
shallow content learning. As well there is little appreciation that both ‘learning how to learn’ as well as in depth
understanding are both important aspects of such learning.

If inquiry learning
is to be done well then the literacy programme must be tailored to provide
critical information gathering skills (covering a range of media) and, to a
lesser extent, so should the maths programme. For many teachers (and their
principals) this will require a change of mind-set.

A quick look at how schools
apportion their time will indicate how important such twenty-first century
learning is to a school. Do Literacy and numeracy take priority? Is school success focused almost entirely
around literacy and numeracy data?

Markham believes (as
do I) that many current examples of PBL are at best mediocre. Students are
all too often put in groups and turned loose on a problem presenting their finding
as a PowerPoint or display. To be
successful a teacher mustteach students
how to critically research material ( best done as part of the language
programme), introduce students to learning how to learn inquiryskills,value deep understanding, thinking and reflection, and also reward such
things as ‘drive, passion, creativity, empathy and resilience’. When done well Problem Based Learning provides a worthwhile learning experience.

To complete
successful PBL that brings out the best from students Markham suggests teachers
move through a considered design process. Teachers who use inquiry learning
will be aware of the general approach – there seems a general agreement about
the inquiry learning process.

Markham outlines seven design principles that ensure learning will both
be more engaging and more powerful.

1.First
identify the challenge. The learning must start with a meaningful doable
challenge/question/issue that provides opportunities for innovative/creative
thinking.

Markham’s tip.Design
projects that matter. Something that contributes to the community, toexhibitto parents, or for a Science, Maths or
Technology Fair.

My suggestion.The various
strands of each Learning Areas in the New Zealand Curriculum provide ideas to
develop PBL around, or to relate studies to. Even if students generate their
own ideas for studies most of their ideas will naturally relate to Learning
Areas. Studies need to be rich, real, relevant and rigorous.

2.Craft
the driving questions. Consider the deep understandings you want the
children to demonstrate at the end of the study. A few focused questions may
be all that is needed to achieve depth of learning. Some call these ‘hook’
questions.

Markham’s tip. Make certain the problem is relevant. A good idea is
to compare / contrast situation to their own experiences e.g. If studying the
1929 Depression what learning apply to today.

Environmental study

My suggestion. It is important to identify and value students’
prior knowledge before investigating ideas – this is useful to evaluate later
what students have learnt. Through their research/activities/experiments
students construct ‘better’ understandings.

3.Start with the results. This idea is in
line with ‘backward planning’ approaches. What depth understandings would you
like your students’ gain as a result of the study? Keep in mind that a great
deal of learning cannot be predicted as new questions ‘emerge’.

Markham’s tip. Consider how to encourage reflection and deep
thinking to avoid shallow ‘cutting and pasting’ Consider how you will go about
rewarding innovative thinking. How will you organise your teams of students?

4.Build in the Assessment. The key to
high quality PBL assessment is to view content learning as one of several
outcomes that will help students to become more skilful and reflective about
their capabilities. Assessment needs to focus on: ‘learning how to learn
skills’ or competencies (which need to be explicit); personal talents
developed;innovation and creativity;
and depth of understanding.

Markham’s tip. Distinguish between on-going formative assessment
and any final evaluation

My suggestion.Ensure that
assessment in inquiry learning is seen by students as important as assessment
in literacy and numeracy. The best
assessment is, once students have had sufficient experience with PBL, to get
them to complete an independent study of their own choice towards the end of
the year and to observe what skills they exhibit.

5.Enrol and Engage. Starting right is the
key to success. This includes helping students connect their interests to the
question or problem. Also organise teams to be effective by establishing norms
for effective teamwork.

Markham’s tip.Ensure
students are involved in refining questions or the project to incorporate
student voice.

6.Focus on Quality. High quality PBL
relies on teams that demonstrate commitment, purpose and results (as expected
in high performing industries). To complete successful teamwork students need
plenty of time for preparation, drafting and refinement of products,
presentations and skills.

Markham’s tip: Facilitate deep thinking.Teach your students the tools of inquiry and
require teams to practice the skills of dialogue, visible thinking, peer
evaluation, and critique.

My suggestion. A quick read of final producers will indicate if
students have been involved in deep thinking or simply ‘cutting and pasting’.
Quality on-going formative assessment should avoid this.

7.End with Mastery. PBL is a non-linear
process that begins with divergent thinking, enters a period of emergent
problem solving, and ends with converging ideas and products. A good PBL
teacher manages the work flow through the chaos of the product ensuring all
students gain the opportunity and support necessary to experience a sense of
mastery and accomplishment.

Markham’s tip: Reflect.Take
time to review and reflect on the project .Reflect on accomplishments and
evaluate the project against agreed criteria. Was the driving question (s) answered? Was the investigation sufficient? Were skills mastered? What
questions were raised? The project debrief improves future projects, as well as
the teaching cycle of quality improvement.

My suggestion. Gaining skills in PBL, for both teachers and
students, is a developmental process. It is a good idea to begin the year with
simpler guided studies and extend students involvement as students skills
develop until they are able to work independently.

Markham sums up
PBLby saying it ‘promises more
engaging school work and a shift in the culture of learning that should be
visible in the form of more satisfied higher performing, and more innovative
students’. But, he continues, ‘it does require a systematic approach that
fully engages students, offers a blend
of skills and intellectual challenge, and prompts or awakens a deeper curiosity
about life. From that standpoint, PBL is a work in progress.’

My final thoughts.
The ideas outlined by Thom Markham align
well with the work of creative New Zealand teachers past in present and with
the intent of the 2007 New Zealand Curriculum. It provides an alternative
to the current imposition of National Standards with its focus on literacy and
numeracy narrowing the curriculum in the process. It is important to appreciate
the vital role of such areas to be ‘reframed’ as ‘foundation skills’ that
contribute to the success of PBL; it is a matter of emphasis.

It is also an approach that can be applied from
early education to secondary schools where students could work on
interdisciplinary enquiry projects
calling on the expertise of subject specialist teachers to assist students to
achieve in depth understandings .

It seems that, for most, the emphasis is to make sure 'their' school is seen as an 'excellent' school in the eyes of the Education Review Office and their parent community. Although their national Principals' Federation, Teacher Unions and highly respected educators have spoken out strongly against such reactionary requirements such as National Standards, individual principals seem to have been busy ensuring that their individual school 'looks good' - and, perhaps, for low scoring low decile school principals, standing up against such moves might be seen as whinging?

I don't know if the acquiescence of principals, I hesitate to call them leaders, is about a bad case of being risk averse, a lack of a solid educational philosophy, the result of a competitive market to enrol students, or a form of 'creeping Eichmannism'? All I know is that nothing will change until school leaders develop some moral courage to decide 'what is worth fighting for' that is unless they are happy to be de-professionalised along with teachers in the UK, the US and Australia.

With an election on the horizon developing a 'position' will be vital if teachers are to be valued as in Finland and Asian countries such as Japan , Korea and Singapore; countries that dramatically outscore the de-professionalised countries mentioned above.

Perhaps another cause of educational timidity is the reluctance to become involved in politics and, in the process, becoming willing pawns implementing government policy right or wrong - and wrong it is.

The real possibility of educational change of direction at the next election ( as part of a shift in the political air away from the now seen as failing 'market forces' ideology ) is why I continue to write my blog.

﻿﻿

Lets get behind Chris Hipkins

Recently the highly regarded Labour Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins held a public meeting in our city to express an alternative point of view - which he did very eloquently. There were a number of retired teachers present, some teachers but not one local principal attended. They had all been personally invited.
﻿

1.If a new government results after next years election
the welfare of people needs to placed ahead of the worshipping of the economy ;the current government's 'market forces' ideology has resulted in a ' winner/loser'
scenario. For an positive, productive and inclusive future developing the creativity of all citizens must be seen as the
number one asset that is if we are to replace the current scenario favouring the rich leaving the poor with the myth that wealth will 'trickle down'.

3.Such a vision requires a move away from current
'standardisation' towards a 'personalisation' of learning; tailoring education to the needs of the student. Such an emphasis on personalisation would require a dramatic shift in current
school philosophy and culture .

5.It will also be important to re-interpret the so called ‘achievement gap’ as
an 'opportunity gap’ to ensure those students, who are currently been seen as 'failing', gain the necessary experiences required to
develop positive learning identities.

6.Literacy and numeracy need to remain vital learning areas but need to be 'reframed' to be seen as important 'foundational skills' allowing students to ‘seek, use and create their own knowledge’.

8.Good advice will be to encourage schools to do 'fewer things well' so as to
develop deep understanding of knowledge and, in the process, to develop life-long learning dispositions.

9.Due to growing lack of engagement in the years 7 to 10 it will be important to encourage the development of innovative learningintegrated/collaborative organisations. At years 7-10 ages, as this is where student disengagement 'kicks in',
interdisciplinary learning provides an ideal
environment for a range of student talents and abilities to be developed.

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

In the late 60s in
the United Kingdom there were moves to develop new comprehensive secondary
schools to replace the tripartite system of Grammar Schools, Secondary
Moderns and Technical Schools. New Zealand, at this time had comprehensive
secondary schools but in reality the three streams existed in the one school. The situation remains unchanged but with
students staying on longer at school, plus the challenges of an ‘information age’
the need for transformation is even greater.

One of the
educationalists working towards a new conception of secondary education was
Charity James of Goldsmiths College and in 1968 she published her book ‘Young
Lives at Stake’. I think I must have one of the few copies available and it
remains at the top of my favourite educational books.

Charity James
believed it was important to get secondary education right if all students were
to leave able to take advantage of the exciting opportunities the future might
offer.The challenge remains.
Secondary schools need a radical reappraisal to ameliorate the effects of
obvious social and cultural disadvantages and also to develop the needs,
talents and gifts of all students

Such schools are
dysfunctional but there seems little pressure to change them – instead teachers
are criticized for students’ lack of success and even poverty is not to be seen
as an excuse.We need a new model –
and describing this is the thesis of Charity James’s book. Her ideas are exciting,
more so today when the power of information technology is added to the mix!
Knowledge is longer held by ‘expert’ teachers to transfer to students.

Time it seems for
some courage from educators to provide viable alternatives to parents.The field is open for change but any
alternative needs to be realistic, intrinsically interesting and relevant. Anew view of schooling needs to be sufficiently diversified to ensure range of talents is able to emerge. Currently our system favours the academic s, the quick
learners and the conformist students.Too many students find their schooling too restrictive and for such students
there is not the opportunity for them to identify and solve real problems – to
become the ‘seekers, users and creators of their own knowledge’ as it states in
the currently side-lined 2007 New Zealand Curriculum.

Charity James’ book
faces up to the radical challenges of creating a truly comprehensive school
able to realise the diversity and talents of all students. James reminds us
that each individual student has one life to live. Schooling should at least do
no harm. Young lives are at stake.

A transformed school
requires a curriculum that is intrinsically interesting and involve
collaborative learning experiences and this, in turn, requires a new role for
teachers as facilitators, and learning consultants/advisers. Schools need
to ensure their students learn how to learn and, to achieve this, teachers need
to work with their students as partners in discovery. This is not ignoring the
subject strengths of teachers – their specialist knowledge remains a valuable
resource for students to access – and challenge.

Charity James asks
her readers to envisage a good junior class where children are immersed in a
whole diversity of pursuits – and then to picture a typical secondary school
class. Mind you junior classes, due to pressure to comply, are not as creative
as they once were! The two pictures still represent fundamental differences of
values.

Charity James warns thatit would be a grave error to go overboard for individualized learning
and that being given opportunities to follow their bent does not follow that
students must learn as isolates – there needs to be time when students work
collaboratively in groups and on their
own. This warning applies equally to the current idea of personalized learning.

The first step, she
advises, is to appreciate that within flexible grouping there will be times
when students work alone. Learning is not an ‘either/or’ situation.

The second step is to
recognise that programming on the basis of individual needs, interests, themes,
or projects across age groups, can be one part of the day and working with more
defined groups another. She envisages third or half the day would be spent
on flexible grouping in interdisciplinary work an increasing remainder will be
spent on interest based ‘orbital’ work, in mixed ability groups which are
related to individual areas of interest working and in autonomous studies ( for
example mathematics/literacy/ music) with relevant specialist teachers. Students will also be
withdrawn for ‘catch up’ remedial work as required.

The key to success is for students to be genuine decision makers
involved in purposeful (to them) activities. Teachers however, in Charity’s
model, still need to use their expertise to suggest areas worth investigating
but always careful to ensure students ‘buy into’ the suggestions. This is in
line with educationalist Jerome Bruner’s who has written that, ‘teaching is the
canny art of intellectual temptation’. Students need to formulate the questions,
identify the problems, create hypothesises and test them. This aligns well with
the direction of the 2007 New Zealand Curriculum.

Teachers also need to be on the alert about what skills are needed by
their students, to assist their students their evaluate progress and assist in
establishing ‘what next’. This sounds very modern advice! In such situations
Charity James requires teachers see themselves as ‘enablers’, or ‘catalysts’
providing positive suggestions, pre-planning or sketching out possible
activities for students to consider even if the study has been chosen by the
students. Gifted teachers, she writes, can do a great deal to relieve the students
of the debilitating fear of failure by framing problems in ways that make it
meaningful for reluctant learners. This form of teaching relies for success on
respectful relationships necessary to provide students the emotional security
to take risks and to encourage them to express their concerns. Teachers, at all
times, must keep in mind the dispositions towards learning they want to encourage
in their students – in current language - the ‘key competencies’. James writes
she is ‘seeking an education in which young people are actively engaged…in
which they are the decision makers…and in which their perception of each other
and of themselves,…is a major concern of the collaborative approach.’

She defines this as Interdisciplinary
Enquiry (IDE). Enquiry she writes, ‘is the characteristic of the person who
is at heart a scientist to underline enquiry…and of a person who is more akin
to the artist, concerned with creation, to emphasize making.’ Enquiry involves
exploration, experimenting and explanation. The fundamental drive of enquiry is
to make sense of things of expanding ones conception of reality.

Successful enquiry requires students acquire a repertoire of
problem solving skills, strategies and tactics, including taking advantage of
serendipity, being comfortable with not knowing, and valuing persistence and
effort, common to all learning. I envisage this as mainstreaming such things as
the research learning that is involved in Science or Maths Fairs and Art
performances and the like.

The second is Making
– making something new.

Making, James, defines as inventing new possibilities.
Designing is about realising selected possibilities and not followingothers pre –planned designs. Making requires
rigour, collaboration, often frustration and to be successful must be
meaningful to the learner

The third is Dialogue
– time to engage with materials, objects, ideas or people

Enquiry demands
curiosity, Making originality, Dialogue requires being aware of
objects, creatures and persons through the senses and should be a continuing
value underlying all school work. Students need time to observe to appreciate
objects, natural and man-made. They need time to listen and to talk with others
and they need time to reflect on their own experiences. Such Dialogue assists
students understand their sense of identity and increases their sensitivity to
others. Students also need time for private discourse for ideas to sink in.

James is asking schools
to be sufficiently diversified to allow very different children to realise
their talents and for all to experience success. Any success will only be
achieved by the quality of student engagement through meaningful challenging
tasks provided to cater for a range of appropriate levels of competence.

James suggests a
fourfold curriculum.

1.Interdisciplinary
Studies based on open ended negotiated themes/studies/projects involving Enquiry and Making (IDE/M). Advisory
teachers (with pastoral responsibilities for small groups of students) will be
required to assist individual students with their individual learning plans
(IDP) and to assist them create their portfolios of achievement. The various
subject disciplines provide students with ‘lens’ to interpret experiences to
create new knowledge – this echoes how students learn in ‘real-life’.

2.Autonomous
Studies – in some schools this may involve mathematics and literacy and also
relate to remedial studies. Literacy and numeracy need to be ‘reframed’to contribute skills to IDE/M

3.Remedial
Education – related to special needs holding some students back

The approach, as outlined above, goes well beyond what happens in even
the most progressive primary or intermediate schools.

James sees students moving through three stages.

1.The first
two years (ages 11-13) (Our Intermediate schools). Security and recognition
are paramount when first entering secondary schools. Suggested themes could be
‘Man the Explorer’ and ‘Growing Up’ plus integrated studies calling on
traditional learning areas.

2.13 to 14
year olds (years 9/10 in NZ) continues as above but with greater emphasis
in special interest work.

3.Ages 14
-16 and 16 to 18. ( years 11/13 and 14/15 in NZ) As above with special
interest and pre-vocational studies. Ideally students could be assisted in part
time employment, or work experience, or contributing to community life.

As far as any learning goes James writes, ‘people learn in
so far as they see new knowledge, skills and interests into a context of what
already has value for them’.Ideas for
learning can arise from a variety of sources - any aware group of teachers can
plan any number of themes that would attract the curiosity of students. Each of
the Learning Areas provides contexts that, in turn, naturally connect to other
Learning Areas. Such studies will range in time from a few weeks to a whole
term. Focus groups of teachers can pre-plan to the extent of anticipating the
kinds of questions that may arise but in the final analysis the learning
activities must be negotiated to allow student choice and responsibility.

One chilling quote in
James’s book is that ‘it is very easy for teachers to become, without knowing
it, the hired assassins of talent’ when they assume they know best what
students should learn and assume student progress can be extrapolated from past
progress. High expectations need to be held of all students. Many students
who are seen as having an ‘achievement gap’ in reality suffer from an
‘opportunity gap’ which can be bridged at school. Traditional schools currently
limit possibilities for many students by the use of ability grouping, streaming
and setting. All sorts of grouping can be used rather than by ability. Charity
James also believes that ‘remedial catch up’ grouping will become increasingly
important. The most flexible grouping will be the least judgemental.

In James’s vision of
schooling the class is no longer the basic unit. Students need to be
grouped in clusters of 120 to 200 students ( ‘Whanau’ Groups) working with five
or more teachers (who have a diverse set of skills and knowledge) with smaller
clusters drawn from the larger unit as required to complete tasks contributing
to, or arising out of, the current study. Up to half the time will be spent in
IDE/M, the remainder of the time on Autonomous subjects (where possible
providing skills required for IDE/M).The time given to autonomous studies will depend on how well developed
remedial help is being provided - this will possibly be mainly in the areas of
mathematics and literacy. Some students will need massive experience of success
to recover from poor learning identities that may have resulted from previous
teaching or due to difficult home backgrounds. What is required is a non
–judgemental attitude by teachers.Special interest work arising out of IDE/M caters for students with
special abilities or talents.

Obviously new forms
of assessment will need to be developed. Charity suggests observing the learners
while performing tasks to note the kind of behaviours (the ‘key competencies’
of the NZC) being demonstrated and
noting evidence of growth. Students also need be encouraged to appraise their
own improvements or performances as recorded in their personal portfolios. When
students are involved in completing their chosen tasks plentiful opportunities
are provided for teachers to observe students in action. Students’ reports would
identify learners abilities in the various Learning Area noting their strengths
and talents, proposals for future directions, and ways in which parents can
help.

Charity’s
suggestions, presented forty years ago,outline ideas that are still valid today if schools are to developnew school cultures and organisations all
very different from current hierarchical secondary education.Many innovative schools will find much in
common in Charity’s ideas.

Schools, Charity writes,
increasingly needs to see themselvesas
enabling organisation helping students explore themselves as they are and as
they could be and offering all students a smooth passage to future education
work, or leisure, and able to contribute their intelligence to solving current
and future problems.

The first step is for
teachers and principals to consider such forms of interdisciplinary education.
It might have been too early for her ideas to be established in the UK in the
1970s but the time is now right, particularly as information technology is
transforming the role of knowledge in an interconnected world, making
traditional conceptions of schooling increasingly irrelevant.

Charity James’s book ‘Young Lives at Stake’ is based on her work undertaking pilot educational
innovations in secondary schools in England in the late 60s. At this time
Charity James was Director University of London Goldsmiths’ College Curriculum
Laboratory.